USA > Ohio > History of Ohio; the rise and progress of an American state, Volume Four > Part 25
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36
368
THE RIS AHAOTE YMAJADE AND PROGRE
0
the WUWrtHARHO of biswietts good hagonstighrte day Ist,. to 19dm9m fhonimoig bas nositio gribsol somsosd off
to the
Me bas ovitos ;2299900 dtipot-ytaowf edt to odmom
Hppecar
bufal gas plant, but trust@ogbulbstools 44481, ni aotools letasbiasiqgtmablantent la certainty of the induser&i . snul ,ismailgi beibopose be the most productive. Seven townships of Han county and six of Wood proved to be the riche that section of the State.
There were successful operations at Bowling Gi North Baltimore, Fostoria, St. Mary's, and o localities in Northwest Ohio. In Central Ohio reservoirs were tapped at a number of places-nol Lancaster, Newark, Thurston, and Sugar Grove. drill has since traveled to every county of the Stat
A voluminous work could be written on the hist of Ohio natural gas. So extensive has been its use th In all parts of the State our citizens are familiar it, and in scores of communities the householders for many years known no other fuel. It is still pie in billions of cubic feet, annually, to the princh cities. The industries of Ohio have greatly pre from this economical fuel, and the phenomenal dev ment of manufacturing, and also of urban grond are largely traceable to its employment.
On the economic side an unpleasant phase of subject requires to be noticed-that of the systeml and tremendous waste. In recent years, with continuous exhaustion of the fields, a spirit of coni
Postavio
369
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
vation has become manifest, but the early tendency was everywhere most reckless. "One might believe," writes Plutarch, "Lucullus thought his money really captive and barbarian, so wantonly and contumeliously did he treat it"-and the people of Ohio showed a like attitude toward natural gas whenever and wherever they found it. It became the fashion for municipali- ties to offer "Free Gas for Manufacturers," and some- times gratuitous use was guaranteed for five years. The same lavish liberality was shown to domestic users. In Findlay the price "per fire" monthly was reduced by competition from a dollar to fifteen cents, and a further reduction to five cents was about to be made by one company when the municipality stepped in and brought the contest to a close. The city itself was long an active participant in the waste, burning huge torches by day as well as night, and in this manner alone wasting 15,000,000 cubic feet per month during the year 1887. The great wells were frequently ignited to gratify the curiosity of visitors or to afford extra proof that the gas was real to those having money to invest. At Lancaster a pipe line was laid around the race track, and there were nightly races under a dazzling illumination. A writer on the early aspects of gas in Ohio refers to "the strange folly," generally character- istic of the situation, "that seems bound up in the heart of a municipal corporation when it obtains a good supply of gas, that it can find some who can use the fuel up in the largest way and most rapidly, to whom to give it, without money and without price." ("Geological Survey of Ohio," First Annual Report, 1890, p. 256.)
370
RISE AND PROGRESS OF AN AMERICAN STATE
It was the natural gas development that directly opened the way for the rise of the Ohio petroleum industry. From 1860 to 1884 the total production of petroleum in the State had a value of only $579,223. ("Mineral Resources of the United States," 1890, p. 542.) At first territory was exploited wholly for gas, and the by-product of oil found was little esteemed. But gradually the magnitude of the oil supply became apparent, and the petroleum operations assumed im- mense importance. The State's oil production rose in twelve years from 90,081 barrels in 1884 to 23,941,169 barrels in 1896.
The total production of natural gas in Ohio for the year 1910, according to the United States Survey reports on the mineral resources of the United States, was 48,232,406,000 cubic feet, valued at $8,626,954. This production was less than one-half the total con- sumption of the article in the State, which, according to the same authority, amounted in 1910 to over one hundred and eight billions of cubic feet. The supply in excess of our own resources is brought from West Virginia. The history of the Ohio fields shows a steady exhaustion of the gas after varying periods of use, with, however, constant opening of new territory. At present Ohio ranks third among the states for the quantity of natural gas produced.
For the year 1910 Ohio's production of petroleum was 9,916,370 barrels of forty-two gallons, having a value of $8,727,860. This State was formerly the first of the Union for the yield of petroleum, but in 1910 had fallen to the fifth rank.
CHAPTER XIV. THE ADMINISTRATIONS OF GOVERNORS FORAKER, CAMPBELL, MCKINLEY AND BUSHNELL
T HE question of regulating the liquor traffic by taxation had now become the most im- portant question in State affairs. The elec- tion of Judge Hoadly and the consequent acts of his Administration had resulted in the oblitera- tion of all attempts to tax the liquor traffic. The "Scott Law," which had been passed April 17, 1883, undertook to remedy the defects which existed in the "Pond Law." The latter law was declared unconsti- tutional because the Supreme Court held it to be prac- tically a license law. The "Scott Law" was at first upheld by the Supreme Court (see Chapter XIX.), but in a subsequent case it was held that the law was in effect a license and therefore unconstitutional. With no law on the statute book taxing the liquor traffic, that trade was practically free, and an annual revenue which was provided for by this legislation, amounting to $2,000,000, was totally lost to the State.
This situation existing, each party in its State Con- vention of 1885 renominated its old candidate-Gov- ernor Hoadly on the part of the Democrats and Judge Foraker by the Republicans. The platforms of the several parties contained no distinctive State issue except that of the liquor question. The Republicans held the Democratic party responsible for the destruc- tion of the "Scott Law" and the "consequent increase of the burdens of taxation upon all property and the abandonment of an annual revenue of $2,000,000," and they declared for the regulation of the liquor traffic by taxation. The Democrats declared that their party was opposed to "sumptuary legislation" and favored regulation by license, and to that end they advocated
374
THE RISE AND PROGRESS
the submission of a constitutional amendment. A third party that figured in this campaign, and of no little consequence, was the Prohibition, which declared for absolute prohibition of the liquor traffic.
In 1883, Judge Foraker won the attention of the State by his fearless attitude on the question at issue, and through his aggressive speeches he was recognized as the one to head the ticket, largely on account of the fact that the issues were identical and that he had in every way shown his qualifications to masterfully present them to the people. Early in the campaign it became apparent that the two candidates would speedily join in personal debate, as they were replying to each other at long range with very little satisfaction. Consequently, it was not long before Asa S. Bushnell, chairman of the Ohio Republican State Committee, on behalf of Judge Foraker, issued a challenge to Governor Hoadly, through the Democratic State Com- mittee, for a discussion of the issues of the campaign at such times and places as might be agreed upon by those committees. After much correspondence, it was agreed, October 2d, that joint discussions between Governor Hoadly and Judge Foraker should take place at Toledo and Cincinnati, October 8th and 10th respectively.
In the debates which followed, Governor Hoadly opposed the taxation of the liquor traffic both on constitutional and political grounds. He contended that no valid law taxing the traffic could be passed in Ohio under our present Constitution. He further contended that it was an interference with the right of personal liberty, and appealed to the class who
375
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
resented such an interference for support. Judge Foraker, on the other hand, urged taxation as the best means of regulation, and proposed by such legislation to lessen the general taxes of the people by compelling a traffic which contributed largely to making govern- ment expensive, to pay a portion of those expenses. He maintained that it would contribute much toward sup- pressing and preventing the evils arising out of the use of intoxicating liquors. The debates were read with much interest throughout the State and given wide publication. It was generally conceded that in the discussions Judge Foraker presented his case much more effectively than Governor Hoadly, and this notwith- standing that the Governor ranked as one of the first lawyers of the State. But he was unaccustomed to popular oratory and the presentation of his arguments in popular form, while Foraker had developed oratorical powers that made his speeches very impressive and attractive. His courage in presenting the issue and his unwavering adhesion to the principles involved, won not only the admiration of his political friends but the respect of his opponents. A joint debate between two candidates for Governor is not a frequent thing in the history of Ohio politics. The instance under discussion was the first since 1859, when William Dennison and Judge Rufus P. Ranney, candidates for Governor, divided time in public discussion.
There was a similarity in these incidents. Governor Hoadly, one of the leaders of the Ohio bar, in joint debate with a brilliant young member of the same pro- fession twenty years the junior of the Governor, found a parallel case in William Dennison, a young and com-
h
376
THE RISE AND PROGRESS
paratively unknown member of the bar in contest with Ranney, who was then easily the leader of the Ohio profession. Another instance of a joint debate between candidates for Governor was in 1840, when "Tom" Corwin, the candidate of the Whigs, engaged in joint discussion Governor Wilson Shannon, who was a candidate for reelection. As might be anticipated, Shannon stood in small favor as compared with Cor- win. The latter, as the greatest orator of his time, of course found no match in the person of Governor Shan- non, and so disappointing was the performance to the Democrats of that day that the Governor was withdrawn from the stump, and the brilliant Thomas L. Hamer, of Georgetown, was substituted. In him Corwin found a ready debater and a dangerous antag- onist. While he possessed none of the humor, eloquence and power of Corwin, he was a persistent logician, and by sheer force of his arguments almost stilled Corwin in the debates. The last time that gubernatorial candidates engaged in a joint discussion was in 1891, in the McKinley-Campbell campaign, which is referred to later in this chapter.
In this same campaign there was also submitted a group of three important amendments to the Consti- tution, all of which were favored by both political parties. Consequently, the vote in opposition was small. These amendments were adopted for the pur- pose of changing the time of the State elections, as well as the elections for county officers, from October to November and thus conform to the law of the United States regulating presidential and congressional elec- tions. The first of this group of amendments pro-
377
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
vided for the biennial election on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, of senators and repre- sentatives, the terms of office to begin January Ist thereafter. The vote (Ohio Statistics, 1885) on this amendment was 538,858 yeas to 53,177 nays. The second provided for the election of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer and Attorney-General on the same day in November, and was ratified by 536,273 yeas to 53,223 nays. The third amendment provided for the election of county officers on the same day for such term, not exceeding three years, as may be provided by law. This was ratified by 534,669 yeas to 53,629 nays. With these amendments Ohio passed away as an "October State." For years she had been regarded, in the political language of the times, as the "pivotal" State of the Union, and as a result electors and candidates were exposed to great expense and inconvenience and the door was opened to possible corruption and degrada- tion in politics. The dual election system occupied the time of the people of the State, in presidential years, to the detriment of business, and the change that was made was hailed with delight not only by men engaged in politics, but by those in the business affairs of life.
After an exciting campaign Judge Foraker was elected Governor, his plurality being 17,451 over Governor Hoadly. All of the candidates on the Repub- lican State ticket were also elected.
Notwithstanding that the State was carried safely by the Republicans, the Legislature was close, and this fact gave rise to sensational investigations and much
378
THE RISE AND PROGRESS
litigation and dispute concerning the title of some of its members to their seats. In Hamilton county, where the vote was very close, notorious and bold frauds were committed in some precincts of Cincinnati- notably in Precinct A, Fourth ward. The returns from this precinct showed, as was afterwards demon- strated by proof, that fictitious names and tallies were added to the poll sheet to give a majority to the Demo- cratic candidates, including those who were candidates for the General Assembly. In addition to fraudulent additions to the names and tallies, the original totals, which were in excess of the vote actually cast, were altered by changing the figure "7" in the hundreds column of the Democratic vote to "9." This change was apparent on sight, so clumsily was it done. These facts immediately placed in dispute the seats of the four senators and the ten representatives from Hamil- ton county, and objection was made to giving them their certificates of election. The county clerk took the position that he must take the returns as presented to him, leaving each branch of the Legislature to decide who was entitled to a seat therein. On an appeal to the courts an order was obtained enjoining the clerk from issuing certificates to the Democratic candidates and directing how he should canvass the votes. The question was carried to the Supreme Court, and here the action of the court below was reversed and the certificates were ordered given to the four senators and the ten representatives that were claimed by the Democrats to have been elected from Hamilton county. In this manner the whole question was relegated to the respective Houses in which the candidates claimed
D
379
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
their seats. When the Sixty-Seventh General Assembly met, January 4, 1886, the members holding certificates of election were: Senate, 20 Democrats and 17 Repub- licans; House, 58 Republicans and 52 Democrats.
In the Senate the certificates of the sitting Demo- cratic members, which were issued on the face of the returns, were claimed by the contesting candidates to be fraudulent and invalid. Although they had been sworn in, a motion was made to reject their credentials as invalid. These proceedings in the Senate occupied a greater part of the session, the principal question being, on a motion to reject the four senators from Hamilton county, "Should it be put as bearing upon them in a body or as individuals?" The Democrats claimed that each individual case stood upon its merits and the vote should be so taken. If this plan should be adopted, each of the three contested senators could vote upon the case of the fourth, and as there were 19 Democrats to 17 Republicans and all voting was on a strictly partisan basis, it is easy to see what would be the result. On the contrary, if the vote should be taken on deciding the right of the four senators as a body to their seats, then, on similar partisanship, the vote would be 17 Republicans to 16 Democrats. After much debate a committee of six, equally divided between the two parties, was appointed to investigate the charges of fraud. This committee sat from February 4th to April 29th, and on the latter day two conflicting reports were presented to the Senate. The Lieutenant Governor's rulings during the discussion, which was on May 5th, were bitterly protested against by the Democrats, and they refused to vote. Fourteen of
ne y. to ed
E
0
1
re
380
THE RISE AND PROGRESS
them left the Senate and, to avoid service by the ser- geant-at-arms, departed from the State. In the mean- time, the Republicans, then constituting the majority of the members present, but a minority of the Senate, unseated the four Hamilton county senators and admitted to full membership the Republican contest- ants, thus making a Republican majority in the Senate. All of these questions and votes were submitted viva voce and the roll was not called on any of them. A case (State, ex rel Herron vs. Smith. 44 Ohio State Reports, page 348), in which this state of facts was involved, was afterward taken to the Supreme Court. The Court declined to accept any evidence except the record of the Senate, which it held must be final and conclusive unless contradicted by itself, and was not subject to impeachment. Inasmuch as the record had not shown the number of senators voting, there was no proof that the vote was insufficient or illegal.
The proceedings in the House were of a more sum- mary character. The credentials of the ten represent- atives from Hamilton county were subjected to a summary investigation by a committee of the House. After taking a great deal of testimony, the House, by resolution, unseated the sitting members, and their places were given to the Republican claimants, making the membership 68 Republicans and 42 Democrats.
These proceedings were the source of much bitter- ness throughout the State among the partisans and were looked upon with disfavor by disinterested citizens. The unseating of the four Democratic members from Hamilton county by a minority of the full Senate can- not be justified in law or equity, and it is only saved
JOSEPH BENSON FORAKER
Born near Rainsboro, Highland county, Ohio, July 5, 1846; enlisted, July 14; 1862, as a private in the Eighty- Ninth Ohio Infantry, and served to the end of the war, becoming First Lieutenant and Brevet Captain; graduated from Cornell University, 1869, and in the same year was admitted to the bar and began practice in Cincinnati; Judge of the Superior Court of Cincinnati, 1879-82; un- successful candidate for Governor, 1883 and 1889; served as Governor two terms, 1886-88 and 1888-90; United States Senator two terms, 1897-1909; resides in Cincinnati.
a
y
er- ere ns. om an- ved
350
THE RISE AND PROGR
them left the ANALOTanoavida Hqusoservice by the geante troido envor beeldgiH VorodenisAn mod In the me
time, Isw16d+ 16 Bir grt of bevisa bas , Vitastal oidO dtrithe Sen
unsesion ai sitosig asged bris Is ort at bestimmen conte
b9y192 : 0881 bis. 8881 om9vo GonBibis y in the Sen ants estafa betinU ; o0-8881 brs 88-08I amnet wtgromovoDassubmit All of .Asmioni Mf zobi29 ; 0001-1081 amet owt totsuse of the viva voce and the roll was not called"on any A case (State, ex ral Herron vs. Smith. 44 Ohio Stan Reports, page 348), in which this state of facts ww involved, was afterward taken to the Supreme Cour The Court declined to accept any evidence exom the record of the Senate, which it held must be fr and conclusive unless contradicted by itself, and w not subject to impeachment. Inasmuch as the recov had not shown the number of senators voting, th. was no proof that the vote was insufficient or illeg
The proceedings in the House were of a more sun mi . haracter. The credentials of the ten represen suis Trop Tamihan county were subjected to trunmary joxelocaties by a committee of the Hou After taking a great mal add testimony, the House, resolution, unseated the miting members, and th places were given to the Republican claimants, mak the membership 68 Republicans and 42 Democrats
These proceedings were the source of much bit ness throughout the State among the partisans and looked upon with disfavor by disinterested citiz The unseating of the four Democratic members Hamilton county by a minority of the full Senate not be justified in law or equity, and it is only sas
Engraved by Chas.B.Hall. N.Y.
LE Fraker
381
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
from being characterized as revolutionary by the fact that there is no permanent or written record that such proceedings were ever had, the clerk of the Senate at the time having registered the proceedings in the same manner that he would have done had a majority of the Senate done the voting. The Supreme Court, in declining to go behind the record of the Senate, simply followed well settled precedents in law, and though at times such a principle may work injustice, the reversal of it, and permission to impeach the record, would open the way to interminable litigation and make almost every act of legislation subject to contest and dispute. The proceedings in the House, while unusual if not high-handed, were clearly within its constitutional authority, it being provided in the Constitution that "each house shall be the judge of the election returns and qualifications of its own mem- bers"; and undoubtedly the House had the right, after sufficient information, to judge and pass upon the election returns of those elected to its membership. The usual method of contesting was dispensed with in this case because the returns themselves were self- evident of fraud, and it was within the power of the House to acquire such other testimony as it might deem necessary in order to establish the fact that the election returns of its own members were fraudulent and forged. We cannot escape the thought, however, that all of this might have been done in the usual and slow manner of a contest, but it is an evidence of the high spirit of partisanship of those times that poli- tics was operated on the basis that "the end justifies the means."
382
THE RISE AND PROGRESS
On January 12th the two Houses balloted separately for United States Senator, as follows: In the Senate John Sherman received 17 votes and Allen G. Thurman 20 votes. In the House John Sherman received 67 votes and Allen G. Thurman 42 votes. When the Houses met in joint convention the next day and it appeared from the record that neither of the candidates had received in each House a majority of all the votes cast therein, a joint ballot was ordered and taken, which resulted in Mr. Sherman receiving 84 votes and Mr. Thurman 62 votes, and thus John Sherman was declared duly elected to the United States Senate for the fifth time.
Judge Foraker was inaugurated Governor of Ohio January II, 1886. In his inaugural address he covered every subject of State affairs that in his judgment needed attention. In view of the recent frauds on the ballot, he recommended stringent supervision of elections; advocated reforms in municipal government; urged that the benevolent institutions be taken out of politics, and opposed reorganization for political purposes; urged the creation of a State Board of Health, and recommended arbitration boards for the settlement of labor disputes. On the liquor question he expressed himself as favorable to the taxation of the traffic. "For," said he, "if anything has been accomplished by the discussions we have had, it is that there shall no longer be free trade for this traffic in Ohio, either by the absence of all legislation or, by what is equally detrimental to the interests of the State and the morals of the people, only such legisla- tion as there is no public sentiment to support. Such
383
OF AN AMERICAN STATE
was the platform of the party that prevailed at our last election. It was clearly announced and emphatic- ally indorsed. There should be, therefore, an imme- diate enactment of efficient measures to prevent and suppress the evils of intemperance, including the imposition of a tax upon the business wherever carried on. The so-called 'Scott Law' was a wise provision of this character. The decision of the Supreme Court declaring it unconstitutional was founded only on one feature of the statute. The constitutional right to impose the tax was not and cannot be success- fully questioned. The difficulty is removed by simply omitting the objectionable feature. Such a measure has the merit of being practical; no constitutional amendment is necessary; it is immediate in its benefits; public sentiment will uphold and enforce it; it will greatly diminish the number of places where this business is carried on, and if wisely administered it will in a large measure suppress the evils of all, and at the same time yield a much-needed revenue and leave the people free to deal with it further as they may ultimately see fit."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.